MercoPress. South Atlantic News Agency
UK Border Force nets 34 migrants in a boat in the Channel
A group of 34 migrants have been brought ashore after the UK Border Force intercepted a boat in the Channel. The group of people, whose nationalities are not yet known, were brought to shore at Dover by a coastal patrol vessel and given blankets. Read full article
Comments
Disclaimer & comment rulesI hope they were let in, given a cushy job and put up at 5 star hotels - until the government finds them nice (subsidized) homes...
Feb 21st, 2019 - 05:46 pm - Link - Report abuse 0They should never land them in Britain but take them back to France, even if we have to take two migrants from the camps for every one we drop off. Letting them stay here just encourages more people to try it, and it's bound to mean deaths in the channel.
Feb 21st, 2019 - 06:08 pm - Link - Report abuse 0DT
Feb 21st, 2019 - 10:43 pm - Link - Report abuse 0Presume you realized I was being sarcastic....they should be kicked out, forced to apply legally.
Cont of “Maduro's protection in hands of ...”
Student loans exist, but only for fees. In FHC’s last year of govt, inflation was under control, agribiz ‘n commodity exports were increasing foreign reserves…FHC negotiated an IMF loan to guarantee 2003…but it was only in 2008 that Lula decided to “pay off” the IMF…no wonder they ‘praised’ him…they’d been paid !
“…I don't know why they wouldn't use them”. With a debt in USD, with USD rolling in (exports), no problem paying the installments, why “would” they use them ? I repeat, financially speaking it was a bad decision - there was more to be gained by leaving it as it was. Internally, the debt “more” than doubled, and with it, so did the interest payments. Lula’s decision was motivated by populism, which resulted in higher interest payments.
Question : if you had $ 1 million in savings, paying 20% interest a year, ‘n you decided to buy a $ 300,000 home – would you pay cash, from savings, or take out a loan at an interest rate of 4% a year ?
The FT report is outdated…several retirement options, minimum age 65, variable contribution periods, no different to when I retired. For FULL pension (men), age 65 ‘n 40 yrs contribution…nothing radical about that. When the pension system incurs a deficit of R$ 200 billion/year, and growing, what would you do ? reduce age, contribution period ‘n raise pensions ?
The funds collected from the private sector contributions (INSS) are administered almost like a checking account, invested with very low risk / remuneration. Nothing to do with the stock market.
Several State-run Co pension funds on the other hand, were used for speculation on the financial market (by politically-indicated directors) ‘n (deliberately) incurred huge losses for pensioners, ‘n huge profits for the manipulators, i.e., directors ‘n political parties (currently under federal investigation).
Yeah, I knew you weren't being serious. I was, though. There's no way for them to legally apply for asylum in Britain, because France is a safe country so they can just apply there. But if they make it here illegally, or get picked up in the Channel then France is not obliged to take them back, so we have to deal with them. It creates a big incentive for people to sneak in illegally, hence my suggestion.
Feb 22nd, 2019 - 02:42 pm - Link - Report abuse 0“Student loans exist, but only for fees.”
I guess in Brazil it's more common for people to study part time and work through university. Seems to be something Brazil does better; in the UK the system pushes everyone into studying full time and there is very little flexibility. Then later when graduates try to get jobs, they find everyone is looking for (relevant) experience.
Lula paid off the IMF loan in 2005, which according to the BBC was 2 years early:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/business/4527438.stm
“if you had $ 1 million in savings, paying 20% interest a year...”
When I had a mortgage I could have got more than I was paying in interest by investing my money, but I chose to pay it off early instead. So although I know it's not financially sound, I'm afraid I fall on Lula's side in this; I prefer not to owe money to an organisation that can take my home away.
Also, I don't think it's a totally fair comparison, since the IMF loan was presumably in dollars, whereas internal borrowing would be in Reais, which had and have a higher inflation rate. I'm sure the IMF was still cheaper, but the difference may not be as stark.
Re pensions, it's not that I think what is proposed is unreasonable. Far as I can tell, it's still a lot more generous than what we get. But if they are going to save money at all then someone must have to work longer, or pay in more, or get less back compared to now, and you seem to be insisting that no one will.
DT
Feb 23rd, 2019 - 01:54 pm - Link - Report abuse 0Why should the Coast Guard pick up the illegals ? just block their passage ‘n make them turn back....until they learn.
“Seems to be something Brazil does better ;” Not really. Here, students who don’t have to work (to pay the fees) are the minority....so the majority of those who have enough drive to keep on studying, usually need to work as well.
Whether you prefer to fall on Lula's side is irrelevant when it comes to sound financial decisions.....at the time, funds (savings) were paying 20% + a year, so to take out a loan, at 4% a year, was a good idea. No one earning 20% or more per year on savings would use their own money to purchase a home if the interest on the loan was 4%...16% net profit. To not use it would be VERY stupid. No one would take your home because if push came to shove because you'd have the reserves to pay for it. Brazil was in this “comfortable” position, so why get rid of reserves, without the slightest need, and pay 5 x the interest ? No matter how you look at it, it was stupid....and a very fair comparison, because : the IMF loan was in USD, the reserves rolling in, as well, and the R$ /USD exchange rate being stable, the swap (loan for reserves) was one for one…the difference was the 16% more in interest, per year (on the same value, only now, converted to R$).
If you, as an individual, want to pay off a cheap debt, good 'n well, it's YOUR money you're throwing down the drain, but Lula was using OUR money. He acted for his own, selfish reasons, motivated by populism. Don’t think you’ve understood the magnitude of Lula’s shit …the numbers : he paid off US$ 212 billion, which cost 4%, or US$ 8.5 billion interest/year. Internalized, and converted to R$, came to R$ 760 billion, paying interest of R$ 148 billion, or US$ 41 billion….a net loss of US$ 32.5 billion/year…great decision, huh ?
The pension reform needs to be seen in the light of Brazilian reality....the system is bust, so no use crying over spilled milk.
Commenting for this story is now closed.
If you have a Facebook account, become a fan and comment on our Facebook Page!